SPEECH AND DISCIPLINE

At a school event, court rightly finds in favor of principal over
student's right to expression Thursday, June 28, 2007

We put adults in charge of schools and, while they don't always make
the right decisions, it isn't in anyone's interest -- least of all
students -- to undermine their authority.

The principal of the Juneau-Douglas High School in Alaska could have
chosen to ignore student Joseph Frederick's unfurling of a banner,
"Bong Hits 4 Jesus," at a school-sanctioned event. But she viewed it
as encouraging illegal drugs and suspended Frederick.

If Frederick had taken this action on his own, outside of school, at
something other than a school-sanctioned event, we would view that as
an exercise of free speech beyond the reach of school authorities.

Likewise, if Frederick had been engaged in some form of protest of
school policies or even the quality of the cafeteria food, in our
view that would be a legitimate exercise of the First Amendment.

But this incident was neither of those. We believe the U.S. Supreme
Court's 5-4 ruling this week was correct in siding with the principal
in finding that this was not a protected form of speech.

This is not to condone the response of principal Deborah Morse, who
was in a running feud with the rebellious Frederick. He admitted that
part of the prank was to get under the principal's skin. He also was
hoping to get on television when the Olympic torch passed through
Juneau on its 50-state tour in 2002. He succeeded in the first part
of his quest, but not the latter.

Frederick had a history of trouble with school authorities, including
failing to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, which got him sent to
the principal's office.

Students don't lose their First Amendment rights when they cross the
"schoolhouse gate," as the high court ruled in 1969. But this
incident, which Frederick admits was intended not as a statement
about drugs or religion, but as an expression of free speech, goes to
the broader authority of teachers and school administrators. They
must maintain discipline and order among often rebellious and
difficult teenagers without it becoming a "federal case" every time
they rein in student excesses. That's true even when those decisions
are imperfect.

There is little doubt in our mind that the principal overreacted in
responding to Frederick's obscure banner. Better that she had counted
to 10, or taken a deep breath, or pretended she had not seen the
offending words, whatever they were supposed to mean. For this was
simply a test of a principal's patience and good sense, and hardly
the "epic" battle over the right of free speech that the lawyers
would have us believe.